Science Forum

Science Forum

  1. Standard memberExecutioner Brand
    Grass Farmer
    Joined
    28 Nov '16
    Moves
    6068
    07 Jul '20 16:593 edits
    CO2 levels have continued to rise during the complete industrial shutdown yet this was meant to be the problem everyone was talking about...

    https://twitter.com/CO2_earth

    Are we on the wrong path?
    How does this fit in with the [facts]..
    Climate change. ~the over population of animals* [co2+] and a destruction of plant life [co2-].

    Chainsaws also fit in with the beliefs of the industrial [crimes]. Some trees that were converting the co2 into oxygen were over 1,000 years old so they will never be replaced in our lifetimes.

    -Can we removed the co2 effectively through man-made technology like carbon capture? On a global scale to offset animals breathing, volcanoes etc rather than simply at factory sites to do the job our clerics the trees are no longer able to achieve.

    srry for all the edits... too hasty.
  2. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    53125
    08 Jul '20 16:29
    @Executioner-Brand
    Sure, we can do CO2 sequestering but the question is how much of it can we do, can we do enough to slow the increase or bring it down?
    There are bad effects from increasing CO2 that has nothing to do with getting hotter.
    It turns out rice becomes less nutritious the higher the CO2 goes, right now seeing a 17% decrease in the nutrition of rice which has implications for the nutrition of billions of people depending on rice.
  3. Standard memberExecutioner Brand
    Grass Farmer
    Joined
    28 Nov '16
    Moves
    6068
    08 Jul '20 18:094 edits
    @sonhouse said
    @Executioner-Brand
    Sure, we can do CO2 sequestering but the question is how much of it can we do, can we do enough to slow the increase or bring it down?
    There are bad effects from increasing CO2 that has nothing to do with getting hotter.
    It turns out rice becomes less nutritious the higher the CO2 goes, right now seeing a 17% decrease in the nutrition of rice which has implications for the nutrition of billions of people depending on rice.
    Bill Gates invested in a carbon capture venture but like most it is about stopping our future emissions not address the climate change problem. The climate change problem should also address the loss of trees thousand/s of years old, the over population of man and it's farming ventures due to breathing etc. So we need technology that can address the entire issue as a whole.

    I remember when I was 5 in 1976 and at primary school you could skate on the ice. Never happens... chainsaws why. --->photosynthesis.

    Marijuana loves co2. :-). Like light it's food to plantlife.
    But I guess it depends on the plant or even species as to how much is suitable. Marijuana you pump up the co2 to 1200 parts per million and then it can handle a high amount of light(lumens) so increase the growing rate... flowering.
  4. Standard memberExecutioner Brand
    Grass Farmer
    Joined
    28 Nov '16
    Moves
    6068
    08 Jul '20 20:001 edit
    Just of a note... our closet 2 planets(without any trees), venus and mars have co2 levels over 96 percent.

    One could hypothesis* earth is similar but co2 within the ionosphere is stored in the trees, the earth and other regions of life which does not exist on those neighboring planets. Who knows maybe the fight against climate change will lead to inhabiting other planets.
  5. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    53125
    08 Jul '20 23:432 edits
    @Executioner-Brand
    Well it might be good for grass but I think it not a good argument when a food staple of billions of people depend on rice which gets less nutritious the higher the CO2. And that is just one effect, the other being heat retention.

    And I know there are other GH gasses like Methane and water. Methane at least is more temporary even though it is some 25X more efficient as a GH gas, it gets destroyed by ozone and UV, but it takes about 30 years to complete that cycle.
    If for instance all the permafrost melted, a huge influx of methane would shoot into the atmosphere and really raise even further hell with our climate but it would be done in one generation as opposed to CO2 which without powerful technological solutions, will be around for centuries.

    If it got bad enough we would have to settle down on the moon, Mars and maybe outer moons of Saturn and Jupiter. Venus is out of the question, 1500 PSI atmosphere of sulfuric acid and temperature of 900 degrees F.

    The Russians sent a probe to the surface of Venus a few decades ago and it was a slick spacecraft, it had liquid nitrogen cooling lines wrapped around the probe so it could last long enough for some science. Even with that, it lasted all of 20 minutes but they did get some surface photos back to Earth.

    There isn't ANY kind of electronics that can run at 900 degrees at least in THIS century.

    The outer moons would be the other way round, no atmosphere except Titan which has an atmosphere about the same as Earth, ~15PSI but mainly methane and there are massive liquid methane lakes there and weather too but a couple hundred degrees below zero which is the only way you would have liquid methane.

    Most of the big Jovian and Saturn moons have buried liquid oceans of water which may be the best place in the solar system to search for alien life.

    For instance, Europa has jets of water shooting out of the surface hundreds of miles high and that leaves the possibility of shooting a probe, which is in the works at NASA, to fly through those jets and collect the water with paddles and such.

    Bring it back to Earth and do a search for microbes and such and my question if so would be, assuming we do find some kind of life there, even just microbes, does it have the same DNA base as Earthy life or is it some other kind of structure we know nothing about, say instead of a corkscrew ladder, maybe a corkscrew structure like a triangular radio tower or a box square structure, just totally hypothesis but that would be what they would look for if there is in fact any life to be found there.

    And of course Mars, they are near 100% certain there will be SOMETHING there, maybe just fossil microbes but if we get there with enough scientists I am sure they will find it somewhere. There was massive amounts of water for hundreds of millions of years there and my assumption is any place there is water, minerals and energy like early Mars had, life will find a way. I expect they will find life on the moons of Jupiter and Saturn and now they have figured out even Pluto has buried liquid oceans, most likely water so it doesn't matter much how far you happen to be away from the sun to have liquid water since several geological processes can cause enough heat internally to allow liquid oceans buried under the surface and so will not evaporate like the water that used to exist on Mars in significant quantities.

    Even OUR moon has water, ice, but water, in craters that never get sunlight so never has the energy to melt ice and therefore immediately evaporate.

    Thing about that is, if we establish colonies on the moon, near the south pole, you get water to drink and such but electrolytically separate the H and O so you get oxygen to breath and hydrogen as fuel, for rockets and electric fuel cell vehicles.

    Of course this is all in the future, maybe 50 years from now before any of that bears fruit but it will be done barring a world wide catastrophe.
  6. Standard memberExecutioner Brand
    Grass Farmer
    Joined
    28 Nov '16
    Moves
    6068
    09 Jul '20 09:591 edit
    @sonhouse said
    @Executioner-Brand
    Well it might be good for grass but I think it not a good argument when a food staple of billions of people depend on rice which gets less nutritious the higher the CO2. And that is just one effect, the other being heat retention.

    And I know there are other GH gasses like Methane and water. Methane at least is more temporary even though it is some 25X ...[text shortened]... years from now before any of that bears fruit but it will be done barring a world wide catastrophe.
    Thanks. Great post.

    I guess there is no planet like earth in regards to it's distance from the sun. But it could be possible to make the atmosphere like earths if we have the available technology much much greater then what IS currently available.

    Not surprised water is found on the moon. Probably 6,000 years ago it split from earth in a collision. 🤔 Any gold up there?
  7. Standard memberExecutioner Brand
    Grass Farmer
    Joined
    28 Nov '16
    Moves
    6068
    09 Jul '20 11:31
    @executioner-brand said


    I remember when I was 5 in 1976 and at primary school you could skate on the ice. Never happens... chainsaws why. --->photosynthesis.
    Funny that. Heavy hail during the freezing cold night. Hail was everywhere this morning and still in some places at the end of the beautiful sunny day. Yes, you could skate on it. 🙄
  8. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    53125
    09 Jul '20 11:42
    @Executioner-Brand
    six THOUSAND years ago? What's up with that? You do realize if it had happened 6000 years ago there would be no life on Earth except maybe microbes? We are talking about a planet the size of Mars slamming into the Earth pretty much destroying both and the bouncy bits formed the moon and the core of the impactor ended up joining up with the original core of Earth to make a core much larger and that is probably what gave Earth a fairly strong magnetic field which stops the crap coming out of the sun from hitting the atmosphere and sucking it off bit by bit as is what happened to Mars when ITS magnetic field died out.
    I think it will be possible in the future if and when we establish colonies on Mars and with the development of room temp superconductors, a few loops all the way round the equator with a few thousand amps flowing which would last forever, a permanent mag field would be established around Mars that would save whatever atmosphere we would engineer there. Without that field, if we somehow made an atmosphere something like Earth, it would last about 100,000 years and be gone. Of course that could even be acceptable without a mag field but a mag field makes the atmosphere much more permanent.
    Now we know for sure there is still a lot of water on Mars, just underground mostly.
  9. Germany
    Joined
    27 Oct '08
    Moves
    3118
    09 Jul '20 12:01
    @executioner-brand said
    CO2 levels have continued to rise during the complete industrial shutdown yet this was meant to be the problem everyone was talking about...

    https://twitter.com/CO2_earth

    Are we on the wrong path?
    How does this fit in with the [facts]..
    Climate change. ~the over population of animals* [co2+] and a destruction of plant life [co2-].

    Chainsaws also fit in wi ...[text shortened]... the job our clerics the trees are no longer able to achieve.

    srry for all the edits... too hasty.
    There hasn't been a "complete industrial shutdown."
  10. Standard memberExecutioner Brand
    Grass Farmer
    Joined
    28 Nov '16
    Moves
    6068
    09 Jul '20 12:182 edits
    @sonhouse said
    @Executioner-Brand
    six THOUSAND years ago? What's up with that? You do realize if it had happened 6000 years ago there would be no life on Earth except maybe microbes? We are talking about a planet the size of Mars slamming into the Earth pretty much destroying both and the bouncy bits formed the moon and the core of the impactor ended up joining up with the original core ...[text shortened]... re permanent.
    Now we know for sure there is still a lot of water on Mars, just underground mostly.
    I play poker. That's a bluff. 6000 years. Bible. 😉

    Any gold up there?
  11. Standard memberExecutioner Brand
    Grass Farmer
    Joined
    28 Nov '16
    Moves
    6068
    09 Jul '20 12:242 edits
    @kazetnagorra said
    There hasn't been a "complete industrial shutdown."
    Pretty much for a number of months. Major cities were noticing improvements to their pollution levels etc but this was not proven to decrease CO2 by any measurable amount it kept going up at the same rate. Science says you climate change activists are in the wrong boat. The facts make sense to me.
  12. Standard memberExecutioner Brand
    Grass Farmer
    Joined
    28 Nov '16
    Moves
    6068
    09 Jul '20 12:512 edits
    I walked about 5 km. everything covered in hail.

    It's funny cause Execution Brand is a named on everquest but you can't hail him?/?
  13. Subscribersonhouse
    Fast and Curious
    slatington, pa, usa
    Joined
    28 Dec '04
    Moves
    53125
    09 Jul '20 16:06
    @Executioner-Brand
    I assumed that's what it was, Young Earth bullshyte. How YE folks can look at rocks bent 180 degrees like taffy and think that would have happened just a few thousand years ago, I'll never know.
    I make the argument if it HAD happened like that, the amount of energy required would have destroyed life on Earth, maybe saving bacteria. The continents move in a time frame of millions of years so you could make an assessment as to how much energy is involved, then multiply that by ten thousand or a hundred thousand times the amount of energy needed to do that in 1/10,000ths of the time, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to see the implications of that.
    Except for Young Earths, NO such argument swings them a millimeter. The bible timeline is ABSOLUTELY accurate according to them even though it was just a couple of dudes in century 19 who did the Johnny begat rachel and rachel begat billy and billy begat, begat begat ad nauseum.
    Like those biblical accounts could be anything accurate of time periods of thousands of years. Totally ridiculous. But no accounting for taste.
    These things like 666 being the number of the devil, not that that was mentioned anywhere in the bible and the dates of biblical creation, but MEN just did some bogus math and made up the whole deal out of nothing but religious folks being totally gullible, totally believed every word.
  14. Standard memberExecutioner Brand
    Grass Farmer
    Joined
    28 Nov '16
    Moves
    6068
    09 Jul '20 18:271 edit
    @sonhouse said
    @Executioner-Brand
    I assumed that's what it was, Young Earth bullshyte. How YE folks can look at rocks bent 180 degrees like taffy and think that would have happened just a few thousand years ago, I'll never know.
    I make the argument if it HAD happened like that, the amount of energy required would have destroyed life on Earth, maybe saving bacteria. The continents move ...[text shortened]... e whole deal out of nothing but religious folks being totally gullible, totally believed every word.
    Pando, a tree community, is estimated to be 80,000 years old.
    YouTube

    Try this then. A long time ago... 4.543 billion years ago the earth and the moon were one body. After the collision the moon formed, life and possibly gold. It isn't silly to consider the moon and earth were once the same body... like moons on other planets because they are still within the same areas revolving around the sun. Over a long period of time there is a lot of chances for space objects to hit earth(meteors etc)
  15. Germany
    Joined
    27 Oct '08
    Moves
    3118
    09 Jul '20 21:33
    @executioner-brand said
    Pretty much for a number of months. Major cities were noticing improvements to their pollution levels etc but this was not proven to decrease CO2 by any measurable amount it kept going up at the same rate. Science says you climate change activists are in the wrong boat. The facts make sense to me.
    No, not even close, and if you actually investigate said "facts" you'll arrive at the same conclusion.
Back to Top